Steven Stahl

Quite apart from the policy differences between @HaleyforMI and @AbdulElSayed when you run for a party nomination you are making an implicit promise to the voters of that party that you'll support the nominee if it isn't you, just as you'll expect the same from those you've defeated if you win. It's not about the other candidate, it's about the party's voters. Of course there are some cases where policy differences or individual behavior makes that impossible. And if you can't endorse you can't. But you should not expect to play any role in that party in the future since you've violated that promise. Like anything else, conscience is conscience. If that's what you need to do that's what you need to do. But again, you're violating a promise. It is all the more the case here since Rogers is a lockstep supporter of Donald Trump, a diehard abortion rights opponent and a bunch else. Where do Stevens' purported beliefs and values fit into this equation? In this case, there is a level of duplicity on Stevens part with her colleagues and her staff that is inexplicable in any of those terms. She didn't have to tell numerous colleagues as recently as last night and in some cases apparently early this morning that she was definitely voting for El-Sayed. She was either lying to them for no conceivably legitimate reason or she made these decisions as matter of sudden impulse over a period of an hour or two. It's hard to say which possibility paints her in a worse light. I say all this as someone who has strongly supported AES since he won the nomination and wishes he would have denounced that Cenk ad more clearly. There's an endless amount of behavior here from Stevens that simply cannot be explained as any kind of stand on principle. It's personal, impulsive and selfish.